harbinger of universal peace on earth and good will to men, afford the best security for man's temporal as well as eternal well-being:-let this discussion but commence under such propitious circumstances;—and may we not indulge the hope that they are already ripening for maturity? and why should we be faithless with regard to the result? One step will lead to another. For when men begin to feel right, and wish to act right, and are trying to find out the way, Providence will open that way before them, and remove from it all the obstacles which might impede their course.

Already, we are assured, this project of a supreme tribunal to adjust international disputes, has received the sanction of four Presidents, twenty-nine Senators, thirty-four Representatives, and thirty-nine Generals of the United States, besides others in judicial stations, and of high respectability.

Let intelligent and accomplished agents traverse the whole country, and state this project fully to the citizens, and solicit their signatures to petitions. Such a course is indispensable for success. This is the simple, the practical course. All will then see that Peace Societies can do something and are doing something. Let us begin. Let us reach our own government in the way proposed. Let our own government move, and Christendom will move. Remote from European politics and perplexities, at peace with the world, and shewing in all our intercourse with other nations, that we desire to preserve with them the most friendly relations, is not this nation strikingly marked out and called upon, by the Providence of God, to be the instrument in his hands, of these signal blessings to the family of man? Who, among our Christian statesmen, high in station and in influence, will discern these signs of the times, and move, and act, and secure for himself and his country a glory, before which that falsely so called,—the splendor of military renown, of conquest, of national aggrandizement, of unhallowed ambition in any of its forms,-would fade away into speedy and utter forgetfulness?

The Society's means for doing the work of the Prince of Peace, are yet limited, and its efficient supporters comparatively

few in number; but such has been the incipient condition of nearly all great benevolent enterprises. Its friends will not be discouraged. They will look to God for wisdom and strength, and to the announcements of his own prophecies, and the promises of the gospel of his Son, for an unshaken confidence that their labors shall not be in vain in the Lord.

By order of the Directors.

T. H. GALLAUDET, Sec'y.

Hartford, June 16th, 1834.

ARTICLE V.

CRITICAL NOTICES.

BY THE EDITOR.

1.-Quakerism not Christianity: or Reasons for Renouncing the Doctrine of the Friends. In three Parts. By Samuel Hanson Cox, D. D. Pastor of the Laight-street Presbyterian Church; and for twenty years a Member of the Society of Friends. New York: 1833. pp. 686.

THIS is every way a most remarkable book. It is remarkable for its size, (considering the subject,) for its dedication, for its style, for its method and logic, and for the spirit which its language seems to breathe. As to its size :-it is a book of six hundred and eightysix octavo pages. As to its dedication :-it is inscribed to twentyfive, or, if we reckon one who, it appears by a note, would have been included in the list, if he had happened to have been alive,— to twenty-six clergymen, to each of whose names is appended a D. D., and to many of them an S. T. P., or an LL. D., or both, in addition to whom also is addressed a dedicatory "Introduction Miscellaneous," of two hundred and fifty-nine pages! As to its style-it would be exceedingly difficult, consistent with our space, to characterize it fully and precisely. It is entirely unique; a true notion of it can be formed only by those who have heard the author preach in his most exalted moods, or have read his inimitable "Journal of a Visit to Europe," or finally, have attempted to read this book. It is undeniably a specimen of the "curiosa go no farther. To speak in general of the method and logic of this work, and of the spirit which its language seems to breathe, would carry us too far. In regard to the latter point, we shall only say that while the passages produced by the reviewer of this

to

book, in the American Quarterly Review, and a multitude of others that might be cited, are such as to render the impression there expressed very natural, yet we are persuaded that the rebuke administered on the score of the author's spirit, though not entirely undeserved, is yet too severe, besides partaking not a little of the very tone which is condemned. We know the author to be generally amiable and kind-hearted, notwithstanding appearances to the contrary in this work. Take into account his deep and honest persuasion of the falseness and danger of the opinions he combats,-the peculiarity of his intellectual organization, the intense light in which he sees every thing, and the impetuous play of his faculties on every subject;-and we have for every one who knows Dr. Cox, a sufficient explanation of the exaggeration, the apparent want of candor, the heat and bitterness of his book, without supposing so much bad temper, as the reviewer attributes to him. It is intellectual sharpness and vehemence. It is of the head, we trust, more than of the heart. At the same time, the author must not wonder that he is rebuked for his spirit, by those who judge only from his book. Nor has he any right to plead exemption. As before the public, he is justly judged from his work. It is, in our opinion, every way one of the most unfortunate books of controversial divinity we have ever seen. Had it been only one quarter as large,-written with clearness, calmness, and good sense, with purity and precision of language, it might have been read, and would have done good. As it is, we are constrained to say that, in our opinion, the author will be disappointed in his hope that "the volume is destined in Providence to do some good." It will be read by very few; it will do but little towards producing conviction in the minds of those he opposes; and it will, we fear, create an unfavorable impression concerning his head and his heart, among all who do read it.

But we have extended these general remarks much further than we intended. Our principle concern with this book, and our reason for taking it up, is found in that portion of it where the author discusses the doctrine of the Friends, concerning war and non-resist.

ance.

We do not intend to go into a detailed examination of the medley of things advanced by the author in connection with this subject. We shall only advert to two points of remark. The first is the general spirit of his discussion of this subject. He seems to have such a vehement aversion to the Friends, as to be able by no possibility to see any thing good or true any where in their tenets; and the condemnation of any thing by them would seem of itself to create an interest on his part, to think well of it and defend it. Hence he seems to be inclined not only to justify strictly defensive war, but to intimate the "divine constitution" of war in general. This reflection, at least, was forced upon our mind by the language and manner of his discussion, that if we had not known the author's name, and if it had not been for the formal expression of aversion to war at the close of his remarks, we should have supposed that

we were actually reading the extempore slang of some profligate militaire, who from an evil interest was the advocate and lover of war, instead of the considered positions of a minister of the Gospel of Peace. This remark may sound severe; but we say with unfeigned sorrow and regret, that it is justified by almost every page of the portion of this work under consideration.-The questions which the author takes up are certainly of grave interest,—and have been discussed with different views by many of the greatest jurists, statesmen, and philanthropists, with seriousness and mutual respect; yet they are here treated in a style of levity and mockery, and with the most uncharitable imputation of motives. Thus, speaking of the views of the Friends, in regard to the treatment of robbers, "that they should be apprehended and confined," &c.—he says:

"Their views are treason against common sense, against their own safety and fire-side enjoyments, and against the commonwealth, to say nothing of the sanctions of christianity! I should think the proper means of apprehending them, would be to coax them to become Friends. By this means, it is hoped, the prophecies are all to be fulfilled, in turning "swords into plough. shares and spears into pruning hooks ;" so that the nations, becoming quite friendly, are to "learn war no more." So we go, swimmingly along, down the stream of prosperity, to halcyon moorings and a certain port! We are all to become Friends, it seems."-p. 236.

Again questioning the consistency of the Friends in exercising the right of suffrage, while they refuse military service, he says:

"Have I no right here to suggest that casuistry is sometimes marvelously convinced, not by evidence, but by influence; not by the Bible, but the PURSE? If the government charged a pecuniary bonus, or capitation tax, for the privilege of voting, I presume there would be heard some new conscien. tious groaning against the military power, even by Friends! But it gives them influence in a cheap way and hence they forget the dreadful horror they sometimes feel in doing any thing to uphold a military government."--p. 245.

Again: speaking of Washington, the author tells us, that:

"He had witnessed, during the revolution, some of their [the Friend's] twistical () proceedings; and taken several of their luminaries into his own custody, lest their "scruples" might incline rather too far toward royalty and England. In the last war (1812) some became sudden converts to Quakerism; growing quite conscientious in the time of danger, against such profane exposures of life, and either joined the Society, or pleaded a kindred exemption from military responsibilities."-p. 246.

To give only one instance more of that uncharitable spirit which seems to pervade this whole discussion and this whole work:

"How can Friends think it not murder to carry passive endurance to its extravagance in any case "outwardly," while probably real malice lives and practises within them?-p. 249.

Now we say that such language is unjustifiable. What possible end of truth and righteousness can be promoted, by such a mode of

discussion? And how unsuitable to the character of a minister of the gospel! For ourselves, we are no advocates for the peculiar doctrines of the Friends on this subject, any more than on many other points. We think them extreme; but we certainly think they err on the better side. At all events, we had rather err with the Friends, than be right with Dr. Cox, if we were obliged to adopt the Doctor's language and apparent spirit. The tenets of the Friends on this subject, certainly deserve to be treated with seriousness and candor, and their persons with respect. As to their sincerity, certainly no body of men have given more heroic proofs of it in the most trying circumstances, and when every prompting of unhallowed passion was to be denied. If the author had merely read the simple narrative of their conduct during the Irish rebellion, it seems to us that he could not have allowed himself in such language of mockery and uncharitableness.

The other point to which we intended to advert, is the manner in which the author speaks of Peace Societies. His vehement and undiscriminating aversion to the Friends, seems to produce in him a sort of distaste and distrust of these Societies.

"If our PEACE SOCIETIES," he says, "would all be DEFINITE and SOUND in principle, aiming at things proper and practicable, and at these alone, I, for one, have no doubt, not only of their high utility, but of their rapid prosperity and ultimate success. Let them honor the principles of magistracy as laid down in the New Testament; maintain the rectitude of war when strictly defensive, when absolutely necessary in the last resort, when so prosecuted that the guidance of the LORD OF HOSTS can be devoutly invoked on its movements; let them make no canopy or cover for law-hating infidels and universalists; let them recognize and honor the doctrine of penalty, and the armed puissance of the State; let them show rights and duties reciprocally and wisely; let none of them misrepresent the religion of Jesus Christ, as if it contained the "old wive's fable" of PASSIVE ENDURANCE, or as if a man could not have prowess, or "show himself a man," or act valiantly pro aris et focis without malevolence: let them so act and so proceed, and they will take hold of the public mind," &c.-p. 253.

The friends of peace have reason to feel themselves aggrieved by this passage, and to remonstrate with the author. It is full of invidious implications as to Peace Societies, without a single citation from their official annunciations, in justification. As to being "definite and sound in principle, aiming at things proper and prac ticable," this is matter of opinion, and it can be no just cause of offence to us, if the author should not happen to agree with us on these points; but against the implications contained in the remainder of the passage, we protest, as invidious, odious, and false.— There is but one Peace Society in the world, that has taken any formal and exclusive position in regard to defensive war. The Peace Societies of France, Switzerland, Holland, and America, leave this question untouched, and for every man's own private determination. And where is the Peace Society which is hostile to the judicial action of society, and to the maintainance of law and order?